Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?
hi I see that some people are opposing using "4.0", so I give up.
I just write this e-mail to better understand why
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 01:17:45AM +0200, Andrea Mennucc wrote:
>>So I would much prefer if sarge would be called "Debian 4"
>>Do you agree?
> I would prefer to be maintainer of the well known distribution which
> *doesn't* bump versions only for the fun of it.
what is wrong in "bumping version numbers?"
(and I mean, particularly in this context)
so, (I am just curious) , why do people (e.g. you) oppose that?
we all learn from arithmetic that there is an infinite number
of positive integers, so we are not in risk of exhausting them </joke>
> I know that for most people numbers have some magic meaning, but please can
> we try to provide stable OS by its quality and not version number?
> Calling sarge 4.0 won't make it better.
neither calling it 3.1
and I never implied that calling it 4.0 makes it better
it just sounds better (for me at least)
neither choice prevents us from working in making Sarge better